The Rise of China

It seems there is some sort of weird nautical threesome going on between Japan, China and Taiwan over who owns a few rocks in the east china sea.

It seems the rules of the dance are those: Gather a bunch of fishing boat, escort them with coast guard ships to the senkaku island. Start a weird aquatical ballet with the Japanese coast guard, shooting water cannons at each other till everyone is soaked and then go back home...Sprinkle the whole thing with protests at home and trashing each others' nations companies properties.

China is feeling its oats and wants to lock down some offshore oil drilling grounds. Japan wants to keep its territory but has long standing emnity from it's neighbors for being jerks during the '30s and '40s. I *think* Taiwan is there to push back a little against China and to reach for as much before having to inevitably negotiate with China about where the final dividing line is.

That's why China wants one on one talks with all the neighboring sea holding countries. They think they can wheedle everyone down individually and make them deal with competing claims between each other without moving the line with China. Using ASEAN as a forum allows everyone to see who is pushing where so that China can't block off whole sections without everyone knowing.

Japan has had admin rights since 1895. The issue now is that Japan bought those Islands from someone. China claims they owned them several hundred years ago, while Taiwan claims them since they've always fished around those Island.

Norwegian news say that China is sending an aircraft carrier to the area.

Anyone truly interested in this story and not just looking for an excuse to point fingers and name-call could read a pretty comprehensive discussion of the issues surrounding the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands here.

Finally somewhere we could base our might navy from! That and our very own holiday resort (are there good beaches on those islands?)

Now... We just need to find a way to connect those islands to our train network (you can't be part of Switzerland and not be on the train network... that's unimagineable). Do you think China will mind if we dig a tunnel all the way to those Islands from Switzerland?

IIRC the current 'crisis' started when Ishihara Shintaro, the right-wing nutbag (and well-known Sinophobe) who's currently Governor of Tokyo, decided to troll China by proposing to buy the islands & develop them (presumably by erecting a giant middle finger, pointing at China). The Japanese government was more or less forced to buy the islands, to forestall him.

Mindless raving nationalists on both sides can go DIAF as far as I'm concerned.

The Japanese government was more or less forced to buy the islands, to forestall him.

Buy from who?

The Japanese already considered it part of their territory, and it's been administered as such for more than a century. Within the context of Japanese law it was a privately owned island.

The Japanese government probably thought it was avoiding a larger controversy by buying it, instead of letting Tokyo's sinophobic mayor make the purchase. Doesn't seem to have helped much though, since the headline alone was enough to set off riots.

Bammer wrote:

Fidel Cashflow wrote:

Hooray, a new thing to use our 5% of GDP on!

Yes. God forbid two nations have in excruciatingly petty argument over worthless rocks and the United States doesn't forcefully inject themselves into the conflict.

It's not so much about worthless rocks, as much as it is determining coastal boundaries. There is also a larger issue in that China seems to be growing increasingly willing to throw around it's new found heft to intimidate it's neighbors.

I'm sure it seems silly, but conflicts are often instigated over seemingly trivial matters. It's not so much the importance of the spark that matters, but rather the preexisting dysfunctions and animosities that allow such a seemingly trivial thing to set off a broader conflict. In a lot of ways Asia reminds me a lot of pre-WWI Europe, with growing industrial powerhouses and an uneasy peace between historically distrustful nations.

I think it's a mistake to view this as some sort of American caused problem. This is at it's heart a symptom of Asian dysfunction. If we get pulled in it will be because of commitments to defend our allies, and broader geopolitical concerns.

I certainly sympathize with that sentiment. On the other hand we'd have to consider what the consequences of leaving a growing aggressive China unchecked might be. What of our relations with our Japanese and Korean and Taiwanese allies?

I certainly sympathize with that sentiment. On the other hand we'd have to consider what the consequences of leaving a growing aggressive China unchecked might be. What of our relations with our Japanese and Korean and Taiwanese allies?

It's not an easy question.

Well we could treat them the same way we treated the Japanese.

Nuke Beijing. If they don't get the message, then nuke Shanghai, and so on.

I certainly sympathize with that sentiment. On the other hand we'd have to consider what the consequences of leaving a growing aggressive China unchecked might be. What of our relations with our Japanese and Korean and Taiwanese allies?

It's not an easy question.

Well we could treat them the same way we treated the Japanese.

Nuke Beijing. If they don't get the message, then nuke Shanghai, and so on.

Yeah, what the fuck could POSSIBLY go wrong with this plan in a world where both parties have nukes?

I certainly sympathize with that sentiment. On the other hand we'd have to consider what the consequences of leaving a growing aggressive China unchecked might be. What of our relations with our Japanese and Korean and Taiwanese allies?

It's not an easy question.

Well we could treat them the same way we treated the Japanese.

Nuke Beijing. If they don't get the message, then nuke Shanghai, and so on.

If we were going to do that, we should have done it when MacArthur suggested it, before they had nukes.

I certainly sympathize with that sentiment. On the other hand we'd have to consider what the consequences of leaving a growing aggressive China unchecked might be. What of our relations with our Japanese and Korean and Taiwanese allies?

It's not an easy question.

Well we could treat them the same way we treated the Japanese.

Nuke Beijing. If they don't get the message, then nuke Shanghai, and so on.

Yeah, what the fuck could POSSIBLY go wrong with this plan in a world where both parties have nukes?

I'm sure it seems silly, but conflicts are often instigated over seemingly trivial matters. It's not so much the importance of the spark that matters, but rather the preexisting dysfunctions and animosities that allow such a seemingly trivial thing to set off a broader conflict. In a lot of ways Asia reminds me a lot of pre-WWI Europe, with growing industrial powerhouses and an uneasy peace between historically distrustful nations.

I think it's a mistake to view this as some sort of American caused problem. This is at it's heart a symptom of Asian dysfunction. If we get pulled in it will be because of commitments to defend our allies, and broader geopolitical concerns.

Agreed. This is a catalyst for expressing the simmering distrust and dysfunction in the region.

I want to liken it to the Chick-Fil-A stuff that was going on in the US a month or two ago, where latent homophobia was given a means to openly express itself via supporting a franchise that openly opposed same sex marriage. The riots taking place in Asia and the vandalizing of the respective properties is a more destructive version of that. They pounced on a reason to express their anger with the other nation instead of having to keep it bottled up.

I think that the US's obligation to support her allies will pull their military in. China is becoming increasing indignant towards the US, and if a foreign military presence (IE: the US) ends up stationed near these rocks, it's going to escalate the situation very quickly.

I have a feeling that lives are going to be lost over this. This is going to stop being trivial very quickly.

I certainly sympathize with that sentiment. On the other hand we'd have to consider what the consequences of leaving a growing aggressive China unchecked might be. What of our relations with our Japanese and Korean and Taiwanese allies?

It's not an easy question.

China might try to swindle some oceanic drilling rights out of their neighbors, but why do we care? We claim the point of our military is to do the same thing, so we have no business playing cop when others do it too. I know people want this to be some kind of slippery slope, but slope to what? Invading and annexing Japan and Korea and Taiwan? Even if they went that nuts, they wouldn't be able to hold the territory. It would just be a colossal waste of resources and every year the world would ask "Are you jackasses done yet?" until it inevitably collapsed.

Japan, Korea, and Taiwan all pose no threat to China, have strong national identities, and legitimate governments. They are never going to assimilate into China. And without that, there is no endgame. The age of colonialism has ended. If China wanted to go be a colonial empire, they could go take over whatever they want in Africa. But they don't. They just rationally invest, and prosper.

I'm sure the chinese government is thrilled that the unwashed masses are freaking out with nationalist zeal and burning cars for confused patriotic pride. But nothing leads me to believe the party leadership guzzles the same koolaid as the peasants. One of the features of the country is that it doesn't rule with the consent of the people, and so has no obligation to give the people what they want when doing so would be disadvantagous to the stability of the nation. And futile efforts to invade surrounding countries for the sake of worthless rocks and speculative oil wells would certainly qualify as such.

It is rather disgusting to see the American hawks on the sidelines with their fingers crossed crying "oh please oh please oh please." America has become the land of little dogs that bark whenever they see another dog.

China is thirsty for oil, as their domestic supply cannot meet their insatiable demand. There is growing unrest among their most vulnerable, ie. the 50% of Chinese citizens who live on $2 or less per day. These people are being crunched by increasing inflation, consequences of systemic corruption, and increasingly demographic dysfunctions (ie. imbalance between male/female, and imbalance of generations). China will indeed crack down on their own citizens with increasing harshness. Indeed, domestic Chinese insurgencies may begin to gain ground (such in in the remote mountainous regions. A strong American presence will keep the situation contained.

So, we can park a carrier group or something in the way or pick up the phone and unambiguously state "this is the line, if your cross it, we'll cut off your dick" and then leave them be?

Actually, getting our carrier groups too close to China's shore is a dangerous proposition. Land-based anti-ship missiles have grown in sophistication and range, and we don't have a good way to counter it.

They don't have to have an overly impressive navy or air force, if we can't get our carrier battle groups close enough to launch sorties.

Bammer wrote:

I'm sure the chinese government is thrilled that the unwashed masses are freaking out with nationalist zeal and burning cars for confused patriotic pride. But nothing leads me to believe the party leadership guzzles the same koolaid as the peasants. One of the features of the country is that it doesn't rule with the consent of the people, and so has no obligation to give the people what they want when doing so would be disadvantagous to the stability of the nation. And futile efforts to invade surrounding countries for the sake of worthless rocks and speculative oil wells would certainly qualify as such.

I hope you're right, I certainly have no interest in seeing WWIII.

I'm not sure that a lack of Democracy leads to leaders making sane choices and not starting wars. If anything the usual assumption seems to be that non-Democracies are more likely to engage in those kinds of shenanigans.

Why in the name of the gods would we want to prematurely get involved?

Right now it's all a bunch of posturing, of a type specific to East Asian cultures that we suck at, no less.

Look at the big picture, It's a whole new playground for the US. They just renewed military ties with NZ, after decades of leaving them in the dark. With new deals with Australia, Philippians, Thailand, and Indonesia, the future looks bright.

Why in the name of the gods would we want to prematurely get involved?

At this point US officialdom mostly seems to be taking the role of the honest broker. I think most of this is just "what if" type stuff. Aside from perhaps the pivot, I'm not seeing anything that would actually be interpreted as aggression towards China.

Oh, and to be clear, I'm not sure how much of this is grassroots vs. the Chinese people being whipped into violent protest by media distortion. The situation is obviously quite nuanced, with a non-trivial degree of contact between the two plus a Chinese community within Japan.

I'm just going to leave this right here, although I don't understand the hate for Rolex. What is it with the Swiss? Vlip, have you guys been antagonizing the Chinese again?

Not that I know of. I'm going to discount it as opportunity looting. When the state police is inofficialy ignoring the riots is probably a good time to indulge in some good old fashioned theft against other brands.

I wonder who insured all those cars/stores and I certainly hope it's a chinese company, even better if it's a state owned one.

Basically, the way I'm reading into this is that China's having leadership issues, and created this faux-nationalist incident to steer the public's attention away from the central committee (or whoever's REALLY in charge) while it sorts itself out. Once that's done, they'll wash their hands of this incident and pretend it never happened. Unity of leadership is a rather important idea to the Chinese, after all, and when potential leaders are accused of corruption, when their wives are accused of murder, or when they disappear for a few days.. well.. that ain't cool for them.

IIRC the current 'crisis' started when Ishihara Shintaro, the right-wing nutbag (and well-known Sinophobe) who's currently Governor of Tokyo, decided to troll China by proposing to buy the islands & develop them (presumably by erecting a giant middle finger, pointing at China). The Japanese government was more or less forced to buy the islands, to forestall him.

Mindless raving nationalists on both sides can go DIAF as far as I'm concerned.

Why is the right wing nutbag in something called the "Liberal Democratic" party?